ArticleGigaScience2025
Characteristics and filtering of low-frequency artificial short deletion variations based on nanopore sequencing.
Article in GigaScience, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Pooled, Long-read Sequencing for Structural Variant Characterization in Schistosome Populations.Genome biology and evolution · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNanopore sequencing is characterized by high portability and long reads, albeit accompanied by systematic errors causing short deletions. Few tools can filter low-frequency artificial deletions, especially in single samples.
resultsTo solve this problem, we first synthesized or purchased 17 DNA/RNA standards for nanopore sequencing with R9 and R10 flowcells to obtain benchmarking datasets. False-positive (FP) deletions were prevalent (75.86%-96.26%), while the majority (62.07%-79.68%) were located in homopolymeric regions. The 10-mer base-quality scores (Q scores) and sequencing speeds flanking the FP homopolymeric deletions marginally differed from the true-positive (TP) deletions. We thus investigated the raw current signals after normalizing them by length. We found more significant differences in current signals between the reads with and without FP deletions. Indexes including the MRPP A (Multiple Response Permutation Procedure, statistic A), the accumulative difference of normalized current signals, and the Q score were tested for the power of distinguishing between FP and TP deletions. MRPP A outperformed the other indexes in homopolymeric regions and achieved the highest accuracy of 76.73% for challenging 1-base homopolymeric deletions. When sequencing depth was low, the Q score performed better than MRPP A. We developed Delter (Deletion filter) to filter low-frequency FP deletions of nanopore sequencing in single samples, which removed 60.98% to 100% of artificial homopolymeric deletions in real samples.
conclusionsLow-frequency artificial short deletion variations, especially the most challenging homopolymeric deletions, could be effectively filtered by Delter using normalized current signals or Q scores according to the employed sequencing strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.